Human sensitivity to reinforcement: A comment on Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield’s (1997) quantitative literature review
Tóm tắt
In a quantitative review of human operant experiments, Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield (1997) found that humans are less sensitive to reinforcement contingencies than nonhumans are. Human performances were not as consistent with the matching law, and they were more variable from subject to subject. Some of the variables correlated with reduced human sensitivity were surprising. These included collection of the data under more controlled conditions (laboratory rather than naturalistic settings), and inclusions of discriminative stimuli correlated with alternative sources of reinforcement. We discuss these unexpected findings in the light of criticisms that have been leveled against meta-analytic literature reviews (e.g., the wisdom of grouping studies with widely diverse methods), and we suggest ways of improving future analyses of the behavior-analytic literature.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 269–281.
Beardsley, S. D., & McDowell, J. J. (1992). Application of Hermstein’s hyperbola to time allocation or naturalistic human behavior maintained by naturalistic social reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 177–185.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., & Bevan, P. (1977). Effect of punishment on human variable-interval performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 275–279.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., & Bevan, P. (1979). The effect of punishment on free-operant behavior in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 71–81.
Conger, R., & Killeen, P. (1974). Use of concurrent operants in small group research. Pacific Sociological Review, 17, 399–416.
Cook, T. D., Cooper, H., Cordray, D. S., Hartmann, H., Hedges, L. V., Light, R. J., Louis, T. A., & Mosteller, F. (1992). Meta-analysis for explanation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Meta-analysis and its problems. British Medical Journal, 309, 789–792.
Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Kollins, S. H., Newland, M. C., & Critchfield, T. S. (1997). Human sensitivity to reinforcement in operant choice: How much do consequences matter? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 208–220. Erratum: Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 431.
Lattal, K. A., & Perone, M. (Eds.). (1998). Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior. New York: Plenum.
Mace, F. C., McCurdy, B., & Quigley, E. A. (1990). A collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 187–205.
Martens, B. K., & Houk, J. L. (1989). The application of Herrnstein’s law of effect to disruptive and on-task behavior of a retarded adolescent girl. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 17–26.
Oakes, M. (1986). Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioural sciences. New York: Wiley.
Perone, M., Galizio, M., & Baron, A. (1988). The relevance of animal-based principles in the laboratory study of human operant conditioning. In G. Davey & C. Cullen (Eds.), Human operant conditioning and behavior modification (pp. 59–85). New York: Wiley.
Salzberg, C. L., Strain, P. S., & Baer, D. M. (1987). Meta-analysis for single-subject research: When does it clarify, when does it obscure? Remedial and Special Education, 8, 43–48.
Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.
Stern, P. C., & Kalof, L. (1996). Evaluating social science research, second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Streiner, D. L. (1991). Using meta-analysis in psychiatric research. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 357–361.
Takahasi, M., & Iwamoto, T. (1986). Human concurrent performances: The effects of experience, instructions, and schedule correlated stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 257–267.